I can't speak for a droid, but I had my v3xx for four years, and it took multiple drops and was fine. The battery cover did get pretty loose. And my wife used it for two of those years. We now both have smart phones, but that phone held up extremely well.

If the Droids hold up like it did, then they are very durable devices.Reply

I don't know about the X, but my original droid can take a beating. I've dropped it on concrete more times than i can keep track of. I've also dropped it while work on my roof. Tumbled all the way down the roof line and then dropped 9 feet to my concrete walkway. Battery cover came off and a barely noticeable scuff on one of the corners. My screen still has no scratches. My only complaint now is the slow processor and lack of ram.

Considering my clumsiness, I'm hoping one of these new phones can take the some punishment.Reply

I don't know about the Droid X case, but my Atrix is near indestructible. I have dropped it, punched it (so I have anger issues, what), even my 2 year old niece has gotten ahold of it a few times (she responsible for 3 destroyed phones already), and it still works as good as it did on launch day.

And as far as performance, I'm running the SPB Shell 3D launcher with live 3D wallpaper and none of my apps have performance issues, except for angry birds seasons and its full page ads. The only difference between the X2 and the Atrix is the amount of RAM, which could potentially cause a few hiccups. As for battery life, I never have any issues with it. Then again I have it connected to a charger a lot (car dock, notebook, wall charger at night) so I wouldn't notice it as much as others might. Tegra 2 may not be the best on the market anymore, but it is still a solid platform.Reply

No reason to upgrade... I bought my Droid X for .01 from Amazon when I rid myself of the craptastic AT&T in my market.

It is the best phone I ever had (I was an iPhone 4 user on AT&T). Verizon's network is what makes me say that, because ALL of the phone works ALL of the time (calls & data).

The original X is plenty fast. My next upgrade will be when my market goes LTE (a long way off). By then, there will be some great phones to be excited about. Funny how phones are the new *upgrade* hobby for old school computer enthusiast.Reply

Well, we spent the 90s and the better part of the last decade making phones smaller and more portable... and then all the effort went down the drain.You can thank Apple for that. After the iphone everyone try better them with bigger and heavier phone. Remember, in America bigger is better!Reply

Far be it from me to defend Apple, but this has little to do with them. The popularity of streaming media- made possible by WiFi, 3G, 4G, and pocketable 720P level resolution screens, has made phones mini media devices, and as for viewing media on screens, the bigger the better.

I like a small phone, and a large TV screen. The market is in the process of discovering just what compromise people want, and don't want, in terms of size.

Anyway, the current 3.5" screen iPhone is smaller (and more phone-like) than these 4.3" mini-tablets.Reply

I was not bad talking Apple so no point to defend them. I was inferring to the fact that the iPhone revolutionalized/popularized the "mini media devices". I was just a little facetious but thats my style. ;pThat said I am left with virtually no upgrade options unless I want to spend $1000+. Reply

Did you retest the talk time for the original X? Or is your friend's X an early one? I got mine at the beginning of March, and the web browsing tests look similar to what I would expect from my phone (what do you set the screen brightness to?) but I don't think it could get anywhere near 8.9 hrs of calling. I'm used to seeing it drop 10% for 15-20 minutes of calling.Reply

I'm definitely aware of how much of a difference that can make, and we always test in moderate to good coverage areas. In this particular test area, VZW signal (both 1x and EVDO) are above -70 dBm, which is pretty good. I believe there's a screenshot or two that show -70 dBm and -65 dBm.

My Elixir icon shows less helpful stuff like "65%", so not sure what kind of reception in dBm I'm seeing. Though on further reading I doubt it would hit the WiFi browsing time either, with the screen on at my standard 12% brightness and all radios off I don't think it would last almost 9 hrs.Reply

So yeah, I know, Anandtech is a US blog.Still I'm surprised there is no comparison to the Galaxy S 2 - I was already surprised before by this but nothing has changed.

The main reason is because ALL the phones in the comparison look pale when compared with the S2.It's (much) faster than any of the Tegra2 based devices.It has more ram.It's (much) lighter (there's no xperia either)It's (much) thinner (there's no xperia either)it's camera still picture is second to the N8 onlyit's camera video recordings are above average (not blowing others out of the water tho - in 1080p it's zoomed and focusing is slower - in 720p its awesome)it's battery life is (much) improved tooin fact, on the paper, only the resolution (800x480) is lower than the other phones (that sometimes have qHD)

Not only that, but it's also the first phone I'd use instead of an iPhone - it's that much better that it makes sense to switch. But I wouldnt settle for less.Reply

If you know all this, why do you need to see a comparison? Check other sites, they do compare the GS2 with other phones...Imma help you out.... phonearena is one site that does. phonedog is another...Reply

You mentioned in your HTC Sensation review that with a little digging, you were able to come up with the camera sensor used there -- "Samsung’s 8 MP S5K3H1GX 1/3.2” 3264x2488 CMOS sensor with 1.4 µm square pixels "

Though the sensor isn't the only thing as you mentioned (lens, etc.), it's useful to compare stated sensitivities, pixel sizes, etc. across the different current phones as well as generationally. I still feel like the gold standard is the iPhone 4 with its 1.75 µm pixel sites and BSI Omnivision sensor.

Do you have this information for the Droid X and X2? How does one generally determine this? I'd love to be able to figure it out for my Evo 3D.Reply

Iphone4 is by no means the gold standard. Also, there's plenty of variables affecting sensor performance which wouldn't be obvious just by looking at pixel pitch, not to mention how the image processing algorithms affect the final outcome. Unless you suggest AT start evaluating sensors with RAW data a la dxomark, I'd much rather they focus on comparing actual photos as opposed to numerical specs. Reply

I agree that specs aren't the whole picture, but I do think it provides useful insight to augment the results one sees in practical testing -- things like being able to tell how much of the improvement is image processing, what generation the sensor is and recently of development, and seeing if improving the image quality/sensors used is actually a priority for certain manufacturers. More information never hurts and it helps understand the story -- for example, when digital cameras were undergoing the megapixel race one or two years ago, it was clear that low light quality was degrading and pixel sites helped explain that story.

At any rate, I'm no expert on the state of cellphone cameras, but I will respectfully disagree with you on the iPhone 4 -- no other non-camera-phone smartphone (i.e., the Sony/Nokia/etc. type phones with real digital camera level optics and sensors built in, xenon-flashes the whole 9 yards) *I've seen* has the kind of low-light sensitivity and all-around flexibility of the iPhone 4.

It's likely a combination of the relatively large sensor sites, the large fixed aperture of the lens, the BSI CMOS design, and good image processing, but Android mfrs still have their work cut out for them over a year after the iPhone 4 release -- I'd be interested in hearing what other phone is better in low-light and all-around capability, because I certainly haven't seen it.Reply

The new Xperia series (arc/neo/pro/play) seems a good fit, especially considering that the iPhone 5 is slated to use the same sensor as those handsets.

Anyway the criteria you use for comparison are rather humorous, as it reads like the iPhone 4 having the best camera - as long as you disregard those that are better?

HTC is generally known to ship shitty cameras but I'd say both foo, bar, beep and bloop - to name those at the top of my mind - offer some excellent solutions for those who want decent images from their smartphones.

The vast majority of cell/smartphones are those built around sensor/lens/IC SOCs primarily built for mobile applications, they feature LED-based flashes--in essence, they are known to be significant compromises in the world of digital imaging because they are, in other words, phones first, cameras second.

Then, there is a small minority of cell phones that are essentially cameras with phones attached to them -- SonyEricsson C-902, Nokia N82, etc. that feature sensors and lenses pulled from traditional cameras, but with phone functionality -- we're talking about large sensors, camera glass, and xenon flashes intended for P&S digital camera applications and not mobile.

I've heard good things about the new Xperia Arc with the Exmor R BSI sensor, but it hasn't been released in the US yet and neither has the iPhone 5... thus my position that the iPhone 4 leads the pack.Reply

I would say my arc does decent pictures, though perhaps I'm spoiled by the fact that my better half uses a Nokia N8. Color accuracy is good but the focus area is unfortunately very narrow which makes the pictures less good than they could be.

The Samsung Galaxy S2 is arguably better, end results considered.

Anyway, I hope the iPhone 5 does end up using the same sensor as the Xperia line as it'd be interesting to see what a different hard/software solution would do with the same sensor.

Then there's stuff like the Motorola Milestone which also have a great camera, considering.

Would an N8 qualify, or is that too a camera first?

Because from my standpoint I can see something like the Altek Leo being a camera first and phone second but I'd still consider anything in a normal housing to be a phone first.Reply

Have you seen the photos taken with the Nokia N8? They are cleaner that those from iphone4, not to mention more natural looking due to lack of over-sharpening and over-saturation. The iphone4 may be good compared to a crappy phonecam, but it is definitely not the best.Reply

Again, the N8 is an unfair comparison, it's not even the same class of camera phone. Just like the other examples I cited, the Sony C-902, Nokia N82... these are cameras that happen to also be phones. The problem is that these are not apples to apples comparisons.

The sensor on the N8 is 1/1.83″ -- by way of comparison, the Canon S95, a real point and shoot camera with very well-respected low light performance relative to its peers has only a slightly larger sensor of 1/1.7" Not to mention it has carl zeiss branded optics and a xenon flash (like the other examples I cited)

The iPhone 4 uses a mobile camera sensor of 1/3.2" and so does the HTC sensation.

Now I'm all for big sensors in cameraphones--the better the image quality the better, as the best camera is ultimately the one you take with you. And the N8 shows that you can shove real point and shoot sensors into a phone, but let's face the reality -- the market of phones with REAL camera sensors and optics is a very, very, very small niche market (they cost $$$ to put in those sensors) and doesn't reflect the mass market of advanced smartphones.

Again, the iPhone 4 represents the best candidate of this balance, and I'm really hoping others HTC, Motorola, etc. step up their game here, but I don't plan on owning an Apple device in the near future.Reply

It's a valid comparison, the N8 is a smartphone like all the others you mentioned, in the same form factor. I'm not comparing something the size of a DSLR to something that fits in your pocket.

Yes, it has a bigger sensor, just like the S95 has a bigger sensor than average pocket cameras - does that mean the S95 is not qualified to be the gold standard of pocket cameras? Doing so is just a refusal to acknowledge a superior product in favor of the lowest common denominator. Reply

I agree, but I think the distinguishing factor is that the S95 performs better than anything in its class by any dimension.

The large sensor camera phones are still a "niche" in the sense that you have to singularly want exceptional photographic performance to buy one of these phones -- and in return, you have to make several compromises as to the user interface, CPU performance/technology, software ecosystem, etc. The phones are geared towards an audience willing to deal with that.

However, if you look at the other major powers in the phone OS ecosystems (iOS, Win7, Android, WebOS?), none incorporate the large sensor into any phone, much less the kind of flagship phone that you would expect them to pull all the stops out for.

Believe me when I say I would go out and immediately buy the first Android phone with all the furnishings -- dualcore CPU, etc. that *also* included a large sensor and quality glass.Reply

I'm a huge optics nerd (it's what I studied in college at least) so I always try and find out everything I can about the cameras in here. Usually that ends up being very little because it either isn't documented, or there's no information in the place I look.

For the sensor type, it's easy enough to just run dmesg and scan through there. HTC lately has been initializing the camera and leaving the part number right there. I searched through on the X2 and couldn't find any camera sensor part numbers even in the sections where they're clearly starting to init the camera. It's unfortunate, because otherwise we could get a better feel for what sensors are usually very good and which ones usually aren't.

It's interesting that Apple did such a good job marketing backside illumination with the iPhone 4, when essentially every sensor at or over 8 MP needs to be backside illuminated (and thinned) due to skew effects. That said their camera is indeed very good.

Why do the graphs always compare the usual Samsung and Motorolla phones, the old practically irrelevant iphone 3gs, Nexus One and Dell Streak, but not more variety of modern phones, like the Nokia N8, for example? Instead of grouping tablets and phones in the same graphs, separate the two categories so that each one has a better selection of relevant entries.Reply

I might consider buying this phone if not for the terrible pentile screen door effect, which is simply unacceptable in today's day and age.

The iPhone4 has 960x640x3 subpixels in 5.65in2 area. The Droid X2 has 960x540x2 subpixels in 7.90in2 area. The iPhone has 2.5X the subpixel density of the Droid X2! And it's immediately obvious when you look at the displays - the iPhone4 display is so detailed the image looks printed on, it's in a completely different class.

I'd like to see them add an attachable/detachable slide out keyboard. Then they could also add a gamepad for actual hand held gaming. And they'd get to make money selling more accesories. It's a win for everyone! The thing is so thin as it is it can stand to gain some thickness without being an issue AT ALL.Reply

what do you mean, u cant see the grainy pattern in blue color? i see it just as good as in green, download the engadget app and put the icon on the homescreen, tons of black spots in it where the white subpixels have closed. RGBW sucks, period. Reply

you have to download a gpu rendering browser, its the reason the iphone & samsung galaxy s2 & even the s are able to scroll & zoom in & out so smooth, when you see checker board effect you know its gpu rendered where as the regular android browsers are constantly resizing & adjusting words & images in realtime. they should take a hint from samsungs browser.Reply

Great review as always, but I still find it ironic how far software optimization has to come on Android in general. I realize the X2 is rendering 26%(?) more pixels, but for every time it appears to process actions more quickly than the X, there is an example of it falling behind, like when pulling up the menu with the hardware button, and loading Basemark from the app drawer. Also, if you were to load up one of the more scrolling-conscientious launchers from the market, like LauncherPro or Go Launcher, the homescreens would scroll essentially at the device's refresh rate without stutter. Same story with Opera Mobile vs. the stock browser.Reply

The effective available RAM memory on the DX2 is about 70-80mb less than the DX, you can see this by looking at Settings...Applications...Running Services and adding up the used and free memory. I was all set to buy a DX2 until I saw this. Even in the store I could easily make the Moto launcher close and be forced to redraw with only a few programs open. My DX already runs out of memory, I didn't want more problems. Perhaps this memory is taken up by the graphics card?

It would be great if you added some multi-tasking tests to your reviews that would stress memory.Reply

No, if that were the case the memory would still be counted in the Running Services report. The "missing" memory is probably used by the graphics card. I like the Moto "Home" app (especially the "Groups" feature and the "Recent" group) and some of the widgets.Reply

I like the closing thoughts, every new device doesn't have to one up the last one in every last category, even amongst the high end... As phones get more and more advanced they also get more personal, and so does the choice between them. A lot of people won't see LTE for a year or longer, they're far better off with this than any of the current LTE VZW options.

I'm not even with VZW btw, so personally I could care less, more choices are always a good thing for the consumer tho. Speaking of choices, the one thing Android desperately needs more of right now are high end phones sized at 4"or less. I'm a guy, I enjoy my 4.3" device, but the vast majority of women I speak to would never buy something larger than an Atrix and even that's pushing it. Yet many of them still want a device with the latest CPU, video recording capabilities, etc etc.

Anyway, as far as the review... I loved the part about the video recording issues and the SD card, that kind of in depth stuff (not to mention the usual barrage of tests) is why AT phone reviews are second to none. Keep up the good work!

I've had the DX2 for about two months and I've already had 3 replacements. I originally got this phone as replacement for my original Droid X which locked up when I downloaded the 2.3 (gingerbread) update to it. Needless to say, I would rather have my old droid x back! The dual core processor is fast and you can tell this phone has a lot of potential, but it has a lot of bugs in the software and Motorola has yet to announce when they push the 2.3 update out for the DX2. Its kind of sad the the DX has the 2.3, but the DX2 doesn't.

Also the camera and camcorder are really bad on this one. They are a lot clearer and all but the camera is bugging and hesitates a lot when trying to capture footage and all. This is critical if your trying to catch a shot on the fly and you can't because all of a sudden your phone wants to act up. They should have left the dedicated camera button on, but I guess they have their reasons for doing so. All the phones that I have had reset ted on me randomly during calls or watching video and the phone itself gets really hot at times. I believe when they send out a firmware update, all these issues will be fixed, but until then, i would recommend the Droid 3 instead.

By the way, motoblur really sucks on this phone too. The Droid 3 has a revamped moto OS and it seems more fluid and stable than the Droid X2 OS!Reply

I have the Droid x2. I have gashes in this phone and it works like a dream. I have dropped it more times than I can count and it still works amazing. I was at a bar and got shot at and my phone FLEW across a parking lot, lost the battery cover and it still works and the screen holds up its end of the deal too :) I love it :)Reply